MFA: ICJ to render its judgment on Phra Viharn case next year

BANGKOK, 15 October 2013 The Ministry of Foreign Affairs says the International Court of Justice (ICJ) will render its ruling on Phra Viharn case early next year.

After a meeting of senior officials concerned in the disputed area surrounding Phra Viharn Temple, Permanent Secretary for Foreign Affairs Sihasak Phuangketkeow said the ICJ, also known as World Court, is likely to give its judgment on the case after January next year, adding that no matter what the ICJ’s ruling is, both parties, Thailand and Cambodia, will comply with the decision and cooperate with each other as the ruling will not affect the good relations between the two sides.

He said the reason the ICJ has postponed its hearing is because the court is currently occupied with other cases.

In April this year, both Thailand and Cambodia presented their oral pleadings to the world court, trying to convince the ICJ of their sovereignty in the disputed area adjacent to the Phra Viharn Temple.

Cambodia tried to convince the Court to accept its request for interpretation of the 1962 Judgment by arguing Thailand and Cambodia disagreed on the scope and meaning of the Judgment, in particular with regard to the Temple’s “vicinity” and the withdrawal of forces from Cambodia’s “territory.” Cambodia posited that it had never accepted Thailand’s determination on the limit of the Temple’s vicinity or the barbed-wire fence set up according to the Thai Cabinet’s Resolution in 1962.

Cambodia underscored the status and significance of the “Annex I map” in the 1962 Judgment by claiming that the Court recognized and based its decision on the frontier line on that map.

Meanwhile, Thailand showed the Court that the 1962 Judgment was clear and that Thailand already implemented the obligations contained therein. It also countered with solid evidence against Cambodia’s claim that the Court had recognized the line in the “Annex I map” as boundary to determine the Temple’s vicinity, and maintained that Cambodia had never disputed the Thai Cabinet’s line in effect.